Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Required: Facebook page, and friend the corp. page (Score 1) 358

At a previous job, my employer required all employees to have a page on Facebook and we were all supposed to "friend" the company's corporate page. I told them "Fire me if you like, I refuse to join Facebook." Worked there for quite a while, and never got called out on it. I did, however, have to list any on-line communities I was part of in my "Disclosure and Background Check Release" to get my security clearances. They told me I had to stop posting in the sci-fi discussion group I was a member of. While that was a small price to pay for an amazing paycheck doing something I enjoyed, I thought it was a little draconian.
With their complete dropping of the Facebook requirement, I wonder if I'd have called their bluff if they would have done anything.

Comment: I have *ugh* Hughesnet, you insensitive clod! (Score 1) 170

by Etrigan_696 (#38863417) Attached to: How much of your music/video entertainment is streamed online?

Don't live in the boonies. I mean it. If you live in the boonies, get the hell out of there and move to even a small town. You don't want to rely on satellite internet with it's draconian 550mb a day malarkey. I watch two videos of any size on youtoobs and They cut my bandwidth to dialup speeds.

Comment: Re:This is a bad idea (Score 1) 989

by Etrigan_696 (#33053794) Attached to: Louisiana, Intelligent Design, and Science Classes

I find it funny that the so-called "rational, intelligent people", atheists, have to resort to straw man fallacies and hurtful words.

If you re-read my post you'll see that I say creationism SHOULD NOT be taught in school. That Evolution should be taught in school. And furthermore, if I want to teach my children something else, I'll do so in the privacy of my own home.

Because I identified myself as a Christian, you, and most everyone else that replied, had to do so in a hurtful and antagonistic tone.

And here I thought it was the Christians that did the persecuting and witch-hunting, and that the rational, intelligent atheists would make for a "live and let live" kind of world. ....hypocrite much?

Comment: Re:Learning Without a Negative Response? (Score 1) 329

by Etrigan_696 (#33029892) Attached to: The End of Forgetting

As far as government contractors are concerned EVERYTHING you do EVER is private. Never worked at one of these places, have you? These people are paranoid - constantly. The policy is: Keep your mouth shut, your nose clean, and the curtains drawn, no video, no pictures and never ever write anything down.
In other words, don't do shit that would ever cast a shadow of doubt on you, EVER. They are betting literally Billions of dollars on you, along with the livelihood of all your cow-orkers, and are not about to take any chances of you screwing it up while drunk at a party, dancing with a lampshade on your head.
Wanna drink? Get loaded at your own home all you want, just don't be late for work, and make sure you can pass a piss test in the morning.

There are plenty of people out there like this, and if you don't fit the bill, someone else will. As long as you're not after that job, it won't matter to you, though.

Comment: This is a bad idea (Score 2, Insightful) 989

by Etrigan_696 (#33029620) Attached to: Louisiana, Intelligent Design, and Science Classes

This is a very bad idea - and that's coming from a self-described Christian. I don't want some goof-ball teacher going over something like this with my kid. They can barely get math right. You focus on math/science/history/reading, I'll handle teaching my kid religion and philosophy at home.

And as always, evolution and creation are not at odds. Evolution answers "How?" and creation answers"Why?"

I don't expect my views to be accepted by devout atheists, OR devout Catholics, so let's leave the creationism at home and not have a big fucking fight for no reason.

Comment: Re:Learning Without a Negative Response? (Score 1) 329

by Etrigan_696 (#33029312) Attached to: The End of Forgetting

A company would seriously be fooling itself if it thinks it preserved some kind of integrity by not hiring someone who occasionally unwinds with friends at a party. They already have employees who do that, they just ignore the fact that they don't actively know about it. The fact that they can't distinguish between the two is a problem.

Consider a company that does top secret contracts for the government. If you can't keep your private life private, why should they trust you with their top secret data? One set of loose lips could possibly cost them BILLIONS. So, anything that even looks a little fishy, they want to (and for arguably good reasons) drop it like it's hot.

Comment: Re:Learning Without a Negative Response? (Score 1) 329

by Etrigan_696 (#33029270) Attached to: The End of Forgetting

Even more worrying is the possibility of people deliberately destroying another's reputation. There's no shortage of people in this world with a grudge against someone else. It's quite easy to imagine an example where someone fails to get a job because of something someone has posted about them. It needn't even be true; a prospective employer isn't going to take time to give you the benefit of the doubt when there's plenty of other candidates.

This is 4chan^H^H^H^HEbaum's World's bread and butter my friend. Watch any Good Morning America lately?

Center meeting at 4pm in 2C-543.

Working...